As tantrums go,
Gill and Erlandson’s “ The
Battle for Chumash Identity ” is a doozy. In an attempt to portray
themselves as ethically superior, they falsely accuse me of arguing that
scholars should adjudicate ethnic identity. Then they hypocritically proceed to
do exactly what they just condemned.
They complain that
Erlandson was overlooked by the Los Angeles Times as an “expert” on the
history of families whose demonstrated Spanish colonial and Mexican immigrant
ancestry Erlandson has promoted as “Chumash” throughout his career. As in the
past, he and Gill heedlessly ignore objections from Chumash communities
regarding these neo-Chumash. They conceal the concerns Chumash raised that
initiated the Times’ investigation, and the sociologist of Chumash
heritage who was one of three experts on neo-Chumash history cited by the Times.
The Timeswisely ignored Erlandson, who has refused to familiarize himself with the
evidence for nearly 40 years. He has never raised a realistic criticism or
accurately summarized the evidence’s scope or content. He simply lacks the
expertise. Little wonder, then, that Erlandson again resorts to deception and
ad hominem attacks on his colleagues.